Canon RF 70-200 f2.8 vs Nikon 70-200 f/2.8S vs Sony 70-200 f2.8 GM II vs Fujifilm XF50-140 f2.8
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 чер 2024
- Use this link to get $25 off your PPA membership: www.ppa.com/join/tony-chelsea... #sponsored
Tony Northrup reviews the most important lens in a professional photographer's bag: the 70-200 f/2.8. He compares the latest generation of lenses from the four biggest mirrorless camera manufacturers:
* Fujifilm XF50-140mmF2.8 R LM OIS WR: $950 - $1600 at SDP.io/F140
* Nikon Nikkor Z 70-200mm f/2.8 S: $2120 - $2400 at SDP.io/Z200
* Canon RF70-200mm F4 L IS USM: $1600 at SDP.io/RF200f28
* Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II: $2,800 at SDP.io/s200gm2 - Наука та технологія
I'm still wrapping my head around whether zooming to 400% (fairy dust results) and comparing 24 MP against 50 MP is even fair. I'd be more convinced to see a 100% zoom of equal size .jpg files from each camera.
THIS!!!!
@@vegaryfoss179 You see this for example at 6:13. That is a noticable difference side by side. Like Tony also states, most people wouldn't have anything to complain about the Fuji output and certainly not when you don't have the identical Sony result next to it. But it is not that you can't make great pictures with the Fuji setup, it is trying to compare different lenses. Also, of course you get only f/4 full frame background blur, but that is just part of the crop sensor setup (a big plus for landscape photography where you want a large depth of field without tiny aperture)
I mean, that's the point... Should he have left the Fuji out because it's not 45MP? I'm sure youd be singing a different song if it ranked higher in the comparison. I personally would much rather see the honest results and be aware of the caveats than have to continue to imagine how Fuji compares to "pro" camera systems because it wasn't part of the shootout purely on the basis that it's not full frame.
Tony called all of those things out in this comparison. He also praised the Fuji for what it brings to the table and qualified all of his statements.
Not to mention this is all relative anyway. You're watching this on UA-cam...
Well then pretend it isn't in the test. It's an APS-C camera and honestly doesn't belong with the others just for that fact alone, irrespective of megapixels.
I'm very glad the X-T4 and 50-140/2.8 were included, because I've shot with that exact setup, and I loved it. The fact that the others are better means that any of the four would make me happy. As a Canon shooter now, I'm considering picking up the RF 70-200 because my time with Fujifilm assured me that the 'equivalent f/4' looked great to me.
There's a huge benefit to the compact size of the lens! At Dodgers Stadium (baseball for the non-baseball people), they have a max 6" lens limit. Normally, that would limit you to 85 mm and smaller. But the RF 70-200 is only 5.75 inches because it retracts. So you can get a 200mm game into Dodgers Stadium without a press credential! And by the time you get by security, it doesn't matter that you can extend it to 200 mm and take some amazing shots! Try to get any of the other 70-200 lenses into Dodgers Stadium and they'll make you trek all the way back to your car to leave the gear.
The Nikon Z9 does not have an OLPF.
Thank you! This helps as I'm considering changing brands (because the Alpha 1 is just so danged expensive (vs. R5)).
Nikon did awesome considering the Nikon setup you have there is like $4k cheaper.
Also $400 less price than Sony and Canon.
Most of the price difference comes from the body though, and the Z7 II isn't nearly as good a camera as the R5, let alone the a1.
@@youknowwho9247 Z7 II is the best landscape mirror less camera than R5 and A1, it might not have R5 like AF but A1 is totally different class. How can you compare.
@@souvik8335 How is the Z7 II a better landscape camera than the R5? They offer the same resolution and produce essentially identical images. Camera bodies don't matter for landscapes. Even an old D800E or a7R II would work just as well.
@@youknowwho9247 Better DR and awesome pinpoint AF. I’m not arguing one is better, but there are benefits that help in the field.
Focus breathing (not focal length breathing) is not considered in your testing. All Nikon Z lenses are made considering minimum focus breathing for Hybrid videographers. This makes some of Nikkor glass heavier than their counterparts.
Apparently the new Sony has also minimum focus breathing and is still lighter.
Which is a good reason not to buy into the Z system - adding a video feature by making glass heavier is a terrible trade off, especially considering that no client will care about focus breathing, ever.
I recently went through KEH via your suggestion, Tony (and Chelsea). Got my first FF camera for cheap---the Sony a7r. Throwback with the click-clack shutter and a plain ole kit lens. (I personally love the click-clack sound.) Great low-light photos vs my a6000. And y'all saved me $60 or so with your promo code when I got that and an awesome Sigma APSC lens for the a6000. Next will be saving up for a GM to throw on the a7r. And these reviews of the newer gear do indeed get me salivating. Still, one thing I've learned from you is that being partial only matters so much. All these cameras and great lenses are just that---GREAT! Even the older ones. Thanks again for your guidance and awesome vids once again sir!
Oh, the A7R was my very first full-frame camera, and I also was coming from an A6000 (and a NEX 5N before that). What a great step-up, huh? As long as you don't need good AF tho, ha ha. A really cool thing about starting with an A7R is that the price stays the same. You can buy one used for around $1000, and then sell it for the same price later down the line. That's what I did with mine. Then I got an A7RII, and the an A7RIII, but buying newer bodies isn't worth it economically, so it has to be worth it in other ways (for me, it was better AF and IQ, and then better battery, better menu and slightly better IQ).
Anyway. Congrats on getting your first FF camera! And I hope that you're finding plenty of fun lenses to use it with. The A7R is particularly pleasant to use with vintage lenses.
One more thing the Nikon, Fuji and Sony lens can do the Canon can't is take Teleconverters, sure its a minor thing for some buyers but sometimes its nice to get a little extra reach without having to bring along another lens.
Try out cropping instead of tele-conversation.
+ Sharper
+ Faster due to the f stop you have to multiply the tele-conversation with
+ Cheaper 😜 Crop = free
Tele-conversation = to expensive
@@constantinaichele5357 That might apply more for higher res bodies but 24mp FF bodies like the A7III where you have less megapixels to crop with I feel that the TC still has merit but to each their own.
@@constantinaichele5357 do you realize you can also crop after Tele-conversion? That gives you more reach.
It's not minor. With a 1.4x TC, these lenses retain really good image quality and make a really useful 280/f4. With 2x may be not so good.
@@constantinaichele5357 not advisable with the r6. Just not enough detail available for cropping.
I really like this type of comparison. It's practical and makes a buying decision so much easier. Not every reviewer is able to get a hold of all these tools to make a video like this so i really appreciate you you made one.
I’m not a professional photographer by any means, but as a wildlife biologist I really want Canon to make RF 70-200s with internal zoom. Taking telescoping zoom lenses in the field is not ideal for me (I study crocodiles so lots of water, mud, dirt, and dust)
it's a weather resistant lense
@Photo Bunny I have the Canon 100-400 as well & it’s a fantastic lens with great IQ, this is just my personal preference. If I had the option of internal zoom vs telescoping zoom I’d take internal every time
Then just get the Sony setup, it has exactly what you’re asking for and the Sony A1 is a better photo camera than the R5. Since you’re a wildlife biologist, I think you will benefit from the higher raw shooting speeds and faster sensor readout of the A1. Also there’s no overheating in video which also helps, overall the Sony setup seems better to me
@@lnz971 A lens with external zooming is never as weather resistant as a lens with internal zooming.
I'm glad that you did a comparison of this type of lens. It's a critical one for any camera system. But this comparison is far too short to adequately cover all the things these lenses are capable of and used for. Please make a part 2. 🙂
Tony… how about a follow up video on the Z9. You need to create an ‘I was wrong’ video focusing on the 120 fps claim when you insisted that this would be without AF. I think it’ll be taken positively by your viewers. Take care
Maybe it will be a 'Breaking News' dramatic removing of specs and hard background track video :o) "Nikon have added autofocus to the 120fps shooting mode" :o)
Isn't the Z9 120fps with like 8MP jpegs? I don't think that's worth a retraction.
@Photo Bunny I don't disagree that some people will find it usable, but saying it's "more than enough" is subjective and I think it's a pretty big asterix to put on a pre-release marketing claim, so I still don't think Tony owes anyone a retraction
Uhhh.. you mean like when they do a full review, as opposed to the “I don’t have this and it’s being released tomorrow here’s my best guess” video? Goodness, you can’t actually be that aggrieved by what one guy speculated about a camera in a video one time. Can you?
Imagine being petty enough to demand an apology for an incorrect *guess* someone made. 😀
just one question: have you shot the nikon at 200mm or 70mm for the macro shots? afaik its better at 70mm because the minimun focus distance is under 0.5m at 70mm compared to about 1m at 200mm.
I've used the Nikon 200-500 for closeup shots. Great for chasing butterflies and dragonflies. You don't have to get real close.
I just got the 70-200 Z lens and have not used it much. From the few pictures I have taken, I love the lens.
It is a completely useless test. He is testing a zoom lens without taking snapshots at multiple focal lengths. He has not mentioned the focal length in several of his slides.
@@arpitkumargahlot its the northrups, what do you expect.
Haven't watched the video, but I'm confident that Sony will win. Sony always wins here
@@Chopper153 Who cares?
I would love to see you test the Sony lens on some older Sony bodies.
0:52 the Z9 does not have an OLPF and we do not know if it has worse image quality than the Z7II, the Z9 sensor has a piece of glass in front of it with a protective and antiglare coating, this is to increase durability and possibly image quality, but it is not an OLPF.
Ok we’ll test it soon.
Push - pull zoom means different, it was for lens where you actually had to push and pull the rings to zoom, not rotating.
I love my canon gear but wow...good job Sony. That 70-200 is crazy good, and the contrast/flare test really blew me away.
Ideal if you want to take a lot of pictures like that.
I wish the testing was more thorough. Other sites say the Sony 70-200 is a weak performer with backlight. One picture at one focal length doesn’t tell us anything.
@@livejames9374 is that the new or the old Sony though?
@@KidLexDC : He did say Mark II; 1gen was crappy.
Canon is still better in the longer (above 200mm) focal ranges than Sony
You can control the aperture with the Nikon lens as well. Also the display is clearly a PLUS, how can it not be ?? Even if you can't see it, the rest of us can and find good use of it. We can even use it to actually see the optimal Dof (hyperfocal distance) in that display.
I find it very strange that you are not able to actually point out the advantages of each lens, but still feel you have the right to point out a "winner". It's just sad :(
that's Tony - he just doesn't want to see it
How is a digital display better than an actual physical aperture ring with a scale?
@@youknowwho9247 I think it's all BS anyway. Turning a ring on the lens or spinning a dial which is always at your fingertips is neither here nor there. It's not the film days now, so who cares about a physical aperture ring? The Fuji top dials are the slowest controls to access and totally useless if you shoot in scenarios where you're constantly changing aperture/shutter speed/ISO quickly while grabbing a moving subject.
Great vid! It would be great if you could do an update superzoom shootout, say between the A1/FE 200-600mm vs the R5/RF 100-500mm.
I've used both. I prefer the A1/200-600 combo for birding. If your more onto general nature photography shooting closeups where MFD becomes important then you may prefer the R5/100-500. Rent them before buying
@@nrocha2466 I agree. To me, 500mm is just too short for birding plus is hard to beat that smooth and more importantly super short throw of the FE 200-600mm with it being an internal zoom. But, time has moved on, Nikon is bringing out some very interesting lenses. This Z 800mm f/6.3 PF is just something else. A handholdable prime without having to break the bank for Big White money? Only if the Z9's AF and tracking was better, I would migrate from Canon to Nikon in a heartbeat. Hopefully, the Z9 may improve with firmware updates. So, right now I am just sitting on the fence while I don't have an upgrade path within Canon.
Pretty sure the Z9 doesn't have an OLPF..
@Tony & Chelsea Northrup, when testing the lenses for the size of the bobble head in the image were you lining up the lenses or the sensor line of the camera?
The Nikon Z9 does not have an OLPF
The Nikkor Z 70-200 might be big but the image quality makes it worth it.
Also $400 less price than Sony and Canon.
@@souvik8335 And the Canon wannabe cant even take a Tele convertor
@@Mr09260 Unless shooting with the $8,000+ highest end lenses, teleconverters don't get better image quality than cropping and enlarging in post, and you lose light using a TC.
@@longliveclassicmusic That is only the case with high resolution sensors. When shooting with something like the R6, R3, Z9, A9, etc. a 1.4x teleconverter on a good quality 70-200 always gives better results compared to cropping.
@@TechnoBabble I strongly disagree with this. I've done endless testing in this particular matter and no Nikon F-mount lens is worth putting a TC on over cropping in post.
It would be interesting to see how the Olympus 40-150mm f2.8 compares, especially to the Fuji.
That's an 80-300mm f/5.6 equivalent. It's way below the league of lenses he tested here.
@@youknowwho9247 Agreed but it would still be interesting to see how it compares
@@youknowwho9247 then the Fuji is also not directly in the same league…
The Z9 does not have an OLPF
He doesn't care, he just wants to say it
He is mad as Nikon didn’t send him z9 😂
He couldn't care less about facts
Man, I see so many salty people in the comments you guys amused me. The real message here is simple, there is no true winner. It's only what you prefer to invest your money in.If you bought one of the 3 latest full frame 70-200 2.8, you can be rest assured you are not getting anything less than the greatest as of this date. In fact, most modern lenses released in the last 10-20 years are not that far behind for anyone to produce high quality products for their business. So there is really no need to argue whether yours' the best or not. I'm no longer into 70-200 zooms since I found out that I rather use a prime for evertthing a 70-200 2.8 could do, and accomplish it with a 100-400. It's great to see Sony adding nicely to drive up the competition. Everything we have today, the Z9,R3,R5/R6, RF mount, Z mount can all be indirectly thanks to sony.
The winner is definitely Sony
Exactly @jamesjin ! Companies do what they do inorder to stay in business and pay their employees. That doesn't mean we have to always want the latest and greatest. I'd go on a limb and say that maybe 80% of all users of these gear (me included) aren't using them to their full potential. Ergo, gear doesn't matter. I understand this video had a purpose, but its just another set of parameters to educate oneself on and not get salty here. Oh well. There will always be some of those online.
@@JoaquimGonsalves Gear matters
I'd love to see a flagship 50mm showdown! My 50mm 1.2S for Nikon is a beast, but I'd love to see how it stacks up!
Manny Ortiz has that comparison on his channel. If I remember right, his ranking at the end is 1) Sony, 2) Canon, 3) Nikon.
Obviously, all the full frame zooms here are fantastic. I'm really glad to see Sony's latest efforts, though. Their 35mm f/1.4 GM is the first Sony prime I've used (and now own) that is really up there with what I like best about recent primes from, say, Zeiss and Leica. It has contrast, character, and mostly depth. I've looked at a lot of other's posted photos from this Sony 70 - 200, and I see some of the same. The Sony looks like a brakethrough design to me, and probably all that you could ever want or need for either the A1 or the A7-R IV. Thanks for this review.
The focus breathing on the 35 though... We need the breathing comp on all the Sony bodies now.
I love my 35mm GM, too! So glad I got one!
The Z9 also does not have an OLPF according to Nikon.
Oh you and your facts!
Yep, it's a filter with a dust resistant antistatic coating, not an olpf
When will come out the 24-70 edition?
Also I would love to see with 3rd party lenses.....
really nice video als alsways, but where is the 70-200 from panasonic
I love my Fuji zoom and wouldn’t know the difference if I hadn’t watched this video. And to pay double pretty much on top of an expensive body like the Sony-It gets overwhelming. I am happy with the Fuji but still appreciate all your reviews.
Sony A1 is a better over all camera than the Canon R5. The price is obvious in a different league.
Best overall means everything, including the price!
The Z9 does not have a OLPF. One of many things incorrectly assumed in your Z9 video.
What's that?
What he meant by the R3 doesn't exist yet?
@@njrtech z9 and a1 resolution is so close any sharpness differences would be lens dependent. So whatever Sony or Nikon lens is sharper will have sharper files with those cameras.
Thank you so much, this is very helpfull. I am new to photography, however I plan on starting for my startup business.
Great vid as always! I know there's only 10 of us but would be nice if you had compared the Panasonic 70-200. Been lots of great upgrades recently including an extra stop of image stabilisation in the 70-200 lenses. 🙂
Would probably be better if he compared Panasonic instead of Fuji, just to keep things full frame.
Just shot with the Panasonic 70-200 f2.8 last weekend. Handily outweighs these other lenses, and seemed super heavy at first, but I got used to it, even with the collar removed and going handheld. Stabilization is surprisingly good, which makes the MF focus clutch all the more useful. Now I just need to save so I can buy one for myself!
me too I was asking myself why many youtuber skip such a great camera system (body and lenses)
Maybe a video with the smaller brands (Olympus, Pentax, Panasonic)
I'm tired of hearing about these four
Mr Tony congratulations what is the best compar camera and 70_200 lens
I'm curious how the Fuji 50-140mm would score with the new 40 megapixel sensor cameras.
Why include the APS-C Fuji, but not the full-frame Panasonic S1R and S 70-200 f2.8?
Another thing worth mentioning is that you didn’t include the D850 and the legendary Nikkor 70-200 f2.8 lens.
Big question: I have the fuji X-T3 with the 50-140 and I don't use it that much. Either I use the 16-55, or the 100-400, or the 56mm f/1.2. What subjects do you like to shoot with this type of lens? It's an odd focal range for me. Either I want wide angle, or I want telephoto, or I want a nice fast prime. The 50-140 usually gets left in the car.
Wedding ceremonies. You can't move as freely as you want because you'll block the guests' view. Solution? Shoot from a medium distance and use a zoom to get different compositions and keep frames interesting. => 70-200 is usually excellent. To be fair though, it does depend on the space you shoot in. Personally, I do a lot of church weddings and old churches tend to have very little light, so I need f/1.4 primes to not drown in noise.
Might you all be able to test the new 3.40 firmware nikon update to see how the 1st gen Z6/7 new auto focus updates compare to the Z6ii/7ii?
Good test but I have doubts in the contrast part, the real focus length is obvious different, and it will induce different strong light interference, make the test result totally different, u can see the canon is short focus length, more ambient strong light will come in, maybe u can try to equal the focus length and test again in contrast part.
Don't doubt it's ability to maintain contrast... It's easily the most impressive 70-200 I've shot with. It's sharpness and contrast are impeccable. The mk Ii represents a new level of IQ from a zoom
Thank you for posting this, I'm looking to buy a used EOS R or Z6 and I just wanted to see the optical styles of the Canon vs Nikon. Sony is a bit too sharp and vivid for me from what I've seen otherwise, and an EOS R popped up while I was looking for a Z6 so I'm trying to decide.
@0:52 The Z9 also lacks an OLPF.
Unfortunately. Moire is far worse than a tiny bit of sharpness loss.
@@Bayonet1809 I have been wondering about this. When I got a Pentax K-3 I shot some test pictures with the old 16-50 lens. My photo bag was in the frame and I remember seeing some color moire in the fabric. The Z lenses are all very good and much better than that 16-50. So it does seem to me that perhaps reintroducing OLPFs might be a good thing to do.
But I guess marketing tells a different story. People automatically think an OLPF is bad, even though the difference in resolution is extremely small (I went from a D7100 to a D750 and compared the two).
@@starbase218 Yeah, aliasing in general is really bad on the Z7 for example. I've had distant railings in architectural photos look like swastikas, so offensive!
@@Bayonet1809 Are you pulling my leg? Btw, swastikas are no problem in India or Japan. The symbol is way older than when nazi-Germany used it.
Thinking about it a bit further, it’s not just lens sharpness but also technique. If your technique is good, your shots will be sharper, in which case moire could emerge if you have no AA filter.
Maybe the selectable AA filter on the K-3 wasn’t that bad an idea. :)
@@starbase218 No, I wasn't pulling your leg, the fine detail of some vertical lines was turned into horizontal lines, which in a couple of places along the railing looked like swastikas. I had to zoom in to 100% to see it though. If I had stopped down the lens further to f11 it probably would have eliminated the aliasing, but I didn't know it would show up until I looked at it on a monitor.
HI I am watching all your videos - thank you! I have a son in multiple sports and I love to take video and pictures - I see sony ranks the best, should i go all out? Or do you recommend not needing to? He usually plays outside on turf fields on long island and it is many times sunny or rainy- (soccer and lacrosse) - thanks in advance
By the way, you can adapt all these lenses to the Nikon, but you can't adapt any of the others to each other. So you can buy an autofocus sony E to Nikon Z adapter and use that G master on a Z9.
I have that adapter and it is terrible
@@TonyAndChelsea haha, as in the AF is terrible?
Thanks a lot for the comparison! It's a very good idea to compare optics from different brands and different sensor sizes. I need a zoom lens with an equivalent focal length of 400-600mm. At the same time, it doesn't matter to me what size the sensor will be and what brand of a mirrorless camera (Sony, Canon, Fujifilm or Panasonic). In sight fall: Sigma 100-400mm Sony, new 100-400mm Canon RF, Fujifilm 70-300 and Panasonic 100-300. It would be just a review in the style of this issue. There is nothing like this in all of UA-cam. It would be great if you can do it! 👍
I own and recommend the Panasonic solution, GH5 or G9 plus 100-300 lens, it's the most compact and has the best image stabilization with both lens and camera stabilizers working together. You won't find love for that setup on the Northrup channel but check out Jeremy Neipp and Marlene Hielema and others on YT. Or you could go to 800mm equivalent with the Leica 100-400mm. There are many comparison reviews of the two setups available. Tony did do a good review on FF birding lenses and camera systems a few weeks ago that is worth a watch as well.
@@stever1514 Thanks! I already had a Panasonic 100-300 with a G85, I confirm that this is an excellent lens for its weight and price!
Another great comparison video. Well done.
Though, by the time I upgrade my D 850 and 70-200 vrii, and go mirrorless, I doubt it will still be relevant.
Still, good to stay on top of these things.
I use a D800/D3 and 70-200mm VR1 and don't plan on stopping anytime in the near future. There is nothing wrong with your gear.
Why didn’t you use the Fujifilm GFX with the 100-200 GF lens?
So basically the lenses of the big FF ecosystems are close enought together that they don't really affect which system you choose.
The Focus breathing can be a make or break, depending on how you use your lens.
@@tqlla the sony is 1:4 ratio but even my old 70-200VR1 Nikon lens on my D800 is 1:6 ratio. The newer VR2 and newer lens is 1:8 ratio. My D800 and lens cost a little over $1100 on the used market with
Image quality between them is very close, size and weight are not. I'd take the Canon over the others any day.
will you do the same on the 24-70's ? please
The Canon EF 70-200 f2.8 iii might be better if you prefer internal zooming lenses and don't mind a bit heavier lens. You could also potentially use the variable ND EF/RF adaptor if you do a lot of video.
@@njrtech How do you adapt the Sony lens to the Canon then?
Panasonic has a 70-200mm f2.8 L-mount lens as well as a 70-200 f4 L-mount lens, both of which work with all of Panasonic's "S" cameras (S1, S1R, S1H, S5), but Panasonic is rarely included in your comparisons. I have to wonder why.
You could probably count on one hand the number of Panasonic full frame owners.
@@sexysilversurfer So? Northrup's whole deal is keeping people informed. It looks more like marketing when the "best sellers" are the always the focus. Innovation never comes from the top dogs. Baaa
Would be interested to see the RF vs the latest EF lens... I've got a feeling the EF might spank it!
Probably
Fuji should be comapred with APS-C sensor cameras of this brands. :) A6600, M6, Z50 :) And better comparison for those FF were GFX 50 SII with GF lenses.
Possibly, but the comparison was supposed to be more focused on the lenses. The GFX system doesn't really have a 70-200mm f2.8. The 100-200mm f5.6 is more like a 79-158mm f4.4
GFX has pretty much the same sensor size as FF (the horizontal crop factor between those is only 1.2). So yes, GFX should be compared to FF (and not to "real" digital medium format, which has much larger sensors).
On the other hand, GFX has no lenses which come close to typical FF lenses' application areas.
For example, there is nothing like a GF 85-240mm F3.4, which would have been required to reach (or compete with) FF 70-200 F2.8 (in equivalence terms, applying the 1.2 crop factor for equivalence).
Also does it make sense to get a good deal on say the alpha-7rIII and add this sony gen2 lens?
I tried canons rf 70-20 this weekend . Great image quality and fast af but you have to turn the zoom ring 200 turns and its not that smooth . Prefer my ef mark 2 any
Nice comparison video. I still like my old work dog... Canon 70-200 f2.8 L IS (1st Gen).
If you used Lightroom for all 3 cameras to develop the raw photos, for sure the Fuji lens pictures will be the worse. If you had used Capture One, your final results might have been different? Just wondering.
It would appear this video is old. Not sure why he didn't compare the medium format Fuji with the full frame offerings from Nikon, Canon and Sony. Would have been interesting to see a medium format camera would compare.
I knew the new Sony was good and previously thought it probably matched the RF and Z mount versions but in this comparison its the clear winner for me. Makes me want one ever more now for my A7RIV.
One thing you didn't touch on was video - Nikon have been clear that they have built their lenses for the Z to be true hybrids and are bigger to ensure they are premium for video as well as stills (0 chromatic aberration etc). I have 0 idea how well the other lenses do for this but that's my understanding on why Nikon haven't gone smaller/lighter. To be honest all 3 of the full frame lenses look like they will do a great job if you are in that system which is a win for consumers everywhere
that is marketing BS to explain why theirs are bigger. They seem to have worse AF performance
Sony E-Mount was designed for the cinema line-up as well so most of their lenses are silent and fast. Especially now. Like you, I don't know where they all stand at, but the focus breathing area would be important for those who are doing video. The Sony and Nikon did well in that regard.
I think in the sony backlight test, it looks like more of the light is blocked by the head, while more of it is peaking out on the others. Was the position a little different from camera to camera, because it looks that way in the images.
It is really important to be careful about the camera placement which is why I lock everything onto a heavy tight tripod.
@@TonyAndChelsea but the lenses are different lengths. Ensuring the tripod is the same distance from the subject doesn't guarantee that the shots are identical, does it?
It is a lazy test, that's all. Though in general, newer Sony G master lenses have excellent flare control.
Huhu, before even watching the video I wonder how the Fuji lens even fits into that crowd of full frame glass.
AF performance is very important when comparing lens. Of course, it's hard to compare the lens alone because the body makes a big difference, but it should be included in the comparison.
Sony has the best AF since it introduced eye AF
I’d be interested to see an Olympus EM1m2 with Panasonic 35-100mm added to this comparison out of curiosity!
There's also the Olympus 40-150
@ Tyler Chamberlain : only if you want to be disappointed.
@@TheKentaurion what makes you think I’d be disappointed? I know there are trade offs with m4/3, but the combo I recommended has some of the traits Tony praised in the other systems. Don’t know the results until you run the experiment 🤷🏻♂️ I don’t have the money or connections to gather all the equipment Tony has there so I was hoping he’d throw curious m4/3 users a bone.
@@tycham85 m43 isn't really relevant in 2021 anymore. APS-C matched it speed, feature and size wise, and beat it fair and square value wise.
@@proksalevente I agree that larger sensored systems have become very competitive with a lot of the features that initially differentiated m4/3, but I am still curious. Remember, this video is more about how the workhorse 70-200mm lens works with the system rather than a sensor debate. Tony compared size/length (Panasonic is fairly small and internally focuses), sharpness (the Panasonic is quite sharp in my photos, but I want Tony's input), contrast (I'd like to see this compared in the same studio setup), bokeh (not great separation due to sensor size, but is quality good?), focus breathing and magnification (I'd like to see this evaluated) and starburst/highlight capability (guess I could go shoot in the sun...haha). Again, if I had the money, equipment or UA-cam channel to perform the comparison, I would love to, but that's why I asked Tony if he could do it.
Reason 1 to not buy an Apsc versus an FF : 2m59 😅
I shot the Sony 70-200mm f2.8 GM (prior version) for a long time and it was sharper than the Nikon Z lens of the same specs. Just my individual results however. Also, I think a "winner" depends on how much of a priority you put on the different categories. For me personally, I appreciate and want sharpness more than the other considerations, thus I would rate the Canon #1. I can tell you that the Canon 100-500mm f2.8 RF IS USM is the sharpest lens in its class that Ive used. The wider lens mounts of Canon and Nikon I think will ultimately pan out to be a big advantage in the future development of lenses and IBIS technology. Thanks for the video!
I don't doubt there was significant copy variation with the old 70-200 2.8GM. I too had a very sharp copy of that lens, and have seen a friend's copy that was average at best. Lens lottery is a real thing
@@nrocha2466 Agree! I have in the last few months gone back to Sony full time and back to my trusty 70-200mm f/2.8 ver 1 GM lens. It is amazingly sharp and Im very happy with it. Every system has their +'s and -'s, you just have to figure out what is the most important to your shooting experience! :-)
There is a huge difference between the colors of the Nikon and the Sony. Which one is accurate? Are these pictures from RAW or jpeg?
All the ads in these videos are getting a little crazy. I can’t watch Tony’s Chanel anymore
Why it felt you were crouching the entire time. Was your chair too high or the table too low? Or maybe your back was hurting. Specially because you where unshaved. Great video as always
Not really sure the point of this video. If I own one system, I am staying with it, not changing brands because some youtuber says another brand is a little better.
What if I don't own any mirrorless system yet?
That sony is impressive but damn, it costs twice as much as the Fuji lens.
The Fuji lens should not even be in that comparison, it should be compared with a 70-400 f/4 FF lens.
How does the Canon RF 70-200 f4 compare to the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 G2 with RF adapter?
Thank you, a very interesting test. There is one thing that puzzles me. I watch on a 4K monitor in 4K quality. If you pause at 2:53 before both photos are zoomed in, you can clearly see that in the entire area of the photo on the right, that is Fuji, is much sharper than the one on the left (Sony). Everything changes the moment you zoom in. How it's possible? Looking at the differences after zooming, correctly the Fuji photo before zooming should be the left side, but the EXIF data and the Select and Candidate positions don't change. I don't suspect any manipulation. I myself have two systems with these lenses presented here (Fuji and Canon) and the Canon is sharper than the Fuji and it is quite obvious to me that Sony and Nikon are also. But it's weird, it's not YT compression, and I haven't seen anything like it in my Lightroom. Can you explain to me? Is it possible to download original photos to see on my own computer?
Sony : we want be first in your next review for 5000$
Kudos Sony. Sounds like you hit it out of the park with the redesigned lens.
The Nikon does have a multifunction programmable ring just like the Canon, except it has the oled panel that can show aperture. Not sure how you missed that?
Trabajarias con la Fuji XT4 con el Canon 70-200 2,8, IS en lugar del 50-140 de Fuji ??
I'm surprised the older Sigma heavy weight class Art lenses like the 50-100 is lighter than the lightest here which is the Fuji. Even my old 50-150 Sigma OS is lighter still. And I always find those lenses heavy. Yikes!
That Sigma 70-200 Sports lens though is right up there with the Nikon for weight. I understand it's not in this test but it just perplexes me as to how so many event photographers have used these behemoths in full day shoots. Hats off really! My hands and shoulders would cry though.
Can i mount a sony 70-200mm gm2 into fuji xh2s? What adapter do i need? Is it a bad idea?
Just use native lenses.
how will a smaller sensor affect the lens from gathering light?
What was the firmware on the Canon R 5?
I'm a total noob just trying to build a budget/wishlist, and these reviews are immensely helpful, especially during the pandemic. I'm binge watching this whole-as channel.
Time to start living and not worrying about getting sick.
Good on ya for joining the photography world! Just a word of advice though. Tony has a very strong favourable bias towards Sony, so if you're looking for helpful unbiased reviews on camera gear, you would be much better off looking elsewhere.
Do you have an idea yet what camera you would like to buy?
@@Startyjam Maybe you're the one who's biased *against* Sony. Maybe Sony are making great cameras and lenses right now.
I shoot Canon, by the way.
@@smaakjeks Haha lol Sony are making AMAZING gear right now!! I never said they weren't. I'm not at all biased again Sony. Canon, Nikon and Sony are all making fantastic cameras and lenses, I never denied that... Not sure where in my comment you got that I was biased against Sony. You shoot Canon? Good on ya. That's cool.
Loosen up a bit bud. No need to start a camera manufacturer war. All the cameras and lenses we are getting now are pretty insane
Lens design has basically come to the point that the year the lens first came out determines how good it is. Younger by one year could be visibly better in some way. People used to say that cameras are for now and lenses are for the long term. Not any longer.
Yes to some extent that does seem to be true but why? Is it that competition drives R&D improvement or is it access to better tech - improvement in coatings etc?
Sony Mk2 is certainly a good improvement over original and probably best here. Yet surely physics is physics and there is a limit to how much of an improvement can be made?
i disagree. My canon Ef 100-400 from 2000 ist still amazing.
R3 actually exists. Just not in every hand =) We all know Mr. Cable shot pre-production model at Olympics and told evetything about it, but Fro just showed us pictures from the production model.
Fujifilm in fact has a high megapixel flagship camera: It’s called „GFX 100s“.
🤠👏🏽
he’s talking about x mount
The GFX isn't really a flag ship camera. It's solid for single shot stills, and that's it. Flagship cameras are usually the accumulation of the best of the best that that company has to offer.
One thing worth mentioning is Sony, Nikon and Fuji all can be used with teleconverters but Canon RF cannot be used any teleconverters.
Teleconverters are a total waste of money.
I like the red and pink starburst… best flavors haha
Hey Tony, if crop factor affects light gathered, how many stops brighter is my exposure on my 8x10 with my 4.5 lens than my full frame Nikon? Since it's many, many, many times larger and the shutter only goes to 1/500, I must need hella low speed film to not blow everything out.
Check sdp.io/crop. To answer your question, ISO is based on light per square unit of area, so a larger surface area gathers more total light but the image brightness (which is software gain) stays the same.
@@TonyAndChelsea exactly correct on brightness. so it actually had nothing to do with light gathered, but rather focus distance. That's why it affects DOF by one aperture stop, and not exposure. The way you present it is extremely misleading.
@@joshrock he always speaks bogus when it comes to Fujifilm.
@@joshrock I think you are conflating things. Crop factor in regards to DoF is about distance (Tony made a video which explains that). However, APS-c sensors a lower signal to each pixel (unless the pixel density is matched on the FF equavilant). This means that in terms of signal to noise ratio when gain is applied to the sensor, APS-c sensors are around a stop more noisey (if all else is equal). Tony only uses crop factor to explain it because it makes it easier to visualise and understand. Two different mechanics but the result is technically similar for the end user. I agree that it's a slightly misleading way of representing it but it's a difficult concept to explain without taking up a good few minutes of the video (again, Tony has made videos about this all in the past). Perhaps he should say a stop noiser, rather than darker
@@SuttonBen so it's okay to misrepresent the science as long as it makes it easier to understand the end result? The problem is I've had to explain literally dozens of times to hundreds of people in my vintage lens group of 20k members that it doesn't affect exposure.
Cmon Tony you could have arranged a better sunstar test.. something like night lights
I feel like the contrast test is super super sensitive to the exact position of that backlight. Ie my hypothesis is that if the light is even a single pixel closer to the eye, due to the cameras being in slightly different positions, then the contrast loss will be drastically different.
Of course I haven’t set it all up to test but that’s how my experience with loss of contrast that results from harsh backlighting.
nice vid but why no points system like you normally do.... oh i see so you can pick the winner... got it
The Fuji result doesn't surprise me if I'm being honest. I bought two copies of the 50-140mm and both were returned. I was very underwhelmed by both and was particularly disappointed with the sharpness with very notable softness at f2.8.
Does Tony have a back problem or something?
Y u didn't get the canon 2.8 and compared the f4???
Hand-holding a 70-200 f/2.8 can wear you out? Then why do you use full frame cameras at all?
Sir,
Outdoor test please
Actually, the Sony Alpha 1 is on back order and not available for most of the U.S. market. So, for most of us consumers, we can’t get one if there are none in stock. Thus, it doesn’t yet exist for me. The Canon R5 is also not in stock. I can only request a stock alert on the R5. The Fujifilm X-T4 is also not in stock. However, for a consumer, like myself, the Nikon Z7 II is in stock and available to ship from B& H Photo. For me, the only camera that actually exists is the Nikon Z7 II. Again, Nikon no longer has any competition. It’s the only brand I can buy and have it shipped out the same week. 😎
“DoEsN’t EXiSt YeT”, but tests Sony 70-200GM II that will only release in December. 😂